The Spurs show we should run it back

[jdz101]

Like I said, of the big 3s on each team, we win!

KG vs. Duncan- Wash

RR vs. TP- Wash (wow, Parker scores more and shoots a higher ft %, except with all those stats "someone" declined to add what RR is better at than TP b/c for everything TP does better I can find the same for RR).

PP vs. Manu- PP WINS THAT MATCHUP HANDS DOWN!


So 2 draws and a win for us, our big 3 is better lol!


Now, team wise, SA had the huge edge this season. They were healthy, had chemistry from playing with pretty much the same team as last season, and their role players are stepping up (Splitter especially). Only one of our role players were consistently good and that was Green. We couldn't count on any of the rest of them (well Jet was okay though).


Again, I don't care what SA does (well, I want them to win it all if Mia adv.), I want Danny to run it back!

Rondo has more assists. someone already said that. it contributes for 3 points more per game is the stat, which Tony Parker more than makes up for by himself.
Not sure how anyone can say t his one is a draw. maybe in the playoffs...maybe...but in the regular season, not even. and we have no clue what rondo would do in the play offs this year

PP is not THAT much better than Manu. Just like TD isn't THAT much better than KG

but when you notice that Manu is coming off the bench and TD is playing at the 4 rather than the 5, they have a much...much better team.

RR isn't just better at assisting, he's a much better rebounder and a better defender. PP is much better than Manu. TD is not better than KG.

I'll just agree to disagree.

If you think that Tim Duncan isn't better than KG at this point in their respective careers then you're kidding yourself. Sorry, I love the spirit but that fact is clear as crystal.

[BballTim]

Like I said, of the big 3s on each team, we win!

KG vs. Duncan- Wash

RR vs. TP- Wash (wow, Parker scores more and shoots a higher ft %, except with all those stats "someone" declined to add what RR is better at than TP b/c for everything TP does better I can find the same for RR).

PP vs. Manu- PP WINS THAT MATCHUP HANDS DOWN!


So 2 draws and a win for us, our big 3 is better lol!


Now, team wise, SA had the huge edge this season. They were healthy, had chemistry from playing with pretty much the same team as last season, and their role players are stepping up (Splitter especially). Only one of our role players were consistently good and that was Green. We couldn't count on any of the rest of them (well Jet was okay though).


Again, I don't care what SA does (well, I want them to win it all if Mia adv.), I want Danny to run it back!

Rondo has more assists. someone already said that. it contributes for 3 points more per game is the stat, which Tony Parker more than makes up for by himself.
Not sure how anyone can say t his one is a draw. maybe in the playoffs...maybe...but in the regular season, not even. and we have no clue what rondo would do in the play offs this year

  Not sure how someone decided that 4 or so more assists a game contribute for 3 more points per game. I'd say Parker's been better during the regular season the last couple of years and worse before that, Rondo's generally been better in the playoffs when healthy. And people who have followed the Celts over the last 4-5 years should have a clue how Rondo would do in the playoffs this year. When he's healthy he's one of the best postseason players in the league.

[Boris Badenov]

Like I said, of the big 3s on each team, we win!

KG vs. Duncan- Wash

RR vs. TP- Wash (wow, Parker scores more and shoots a higher ft %, except with all those stats "someone" declined to add what RR is better at than TP b/c for everything TP does better I can find the same for RR).

PP vs. Manu- PP WINS THAT MATCHUP HANDS DOWN!


So 2 draws and a win for us, our big 3 is better lol!


Now, team wise, SA had the huge edge this season. They were healthy, had chemistry from playing with pretty much the same team as last season, and their role players are stepping up (Splitter especially). Only one of our role players were consistently good and that was Green. We couldn't count on any of the rest of them (well Jet was okay though).


Again, I don't care what SA does (well, I want them to win it all if Mia adv.), I want Danny to run it back!

Rondo has more assists. someone already said that. it contributes for 3 points more per game is the stat, which Tony Parker more than makes up for by himself.
Not sure how anyone can say t his one is a draw. maybe in the playoffs...maybe...but in the regular season, not even. and we have no clue what rondo would do in the play offs this year

  Not sure how someone decided that 4 or so more assists a game contribute for 3 more points per game. I'd say Parker's been better during the regular season the last couple of years and worse before that, Rondo's generally been better in the playoffs when healthy. And people who have followed the Celts over the last 4-5 years should have a clue how Rondo would do in the playoffs this year. When he's healthy he's one of the best postseason players in the league.

Parker's playoff resume is nothing to sneer at - I wouldn't say it's better than Rondo's, but I think you could certainly call it a wash and if someone else wanted to argue the Parker case I wouldn't really argue too hard about it.

Just as one example, Parker was finals MVP in 2007, averaging 25ppg in a 4-game sweep of the Cavs. He also just averaged 25ppg and 10apg in that sweep of the Griz in the conference finals, including 37 pts in the closeout game on the road.

I'm not enough of a Spurs expert to know off-hand, but I'd bet he's had other dominant performances.

[PhoSita]

Parker's playoff resume is nothing to sneer at - I wouldn't say it's better than Rondo's, but I think you could certainly call it a wash and if someone else wanted to argue the Parker case I wouldn't really argue too hard about it.

Um, you made a pretty convincing case yourself.

Tony Parker has 3 rings and has been a Finals MVP. 

Statistically, Rondo comes out pretty well in the playoffs against Tony Parker over their careers, but that takes into account a lot of seasons in the early 2000s when Parker was a role player.

Parker's playoff runs this year, last year, and in 2007 are better than anything's Rondo's done, in my opinion.

I don't buy the "Rondo generates the same / more points" argument.  Assists are not the same thing as points.  Parker has shown the ability to be the main shot taker and shot maker for a team that goes all the way.  Rondo has not.  That's really more or less the end of the story for me.


Once we take into account the regular season, too, it's not even close.  The regular season does matter to some extent, because Parker's excellence in the regular season has helped the Spurs to the high win totals which has given them home court advantage so often in the playoffs.

[Celtics4ever]

Parker can score down the stretch, Rondo defers to others and given his free throw shooting who can blame him.  We won many games during his time here we also have lost many a fourth quarter lead.   Granted, this isn't only on Rondo other guys fail to score in the fourth as well.   But Parker can go to the hole in the fourth and Rondo does not.  Parker is an 80% FT shooter.   He can drive and not worry about the FT because he can knock them down.

[Celtics18]

Parker can score down the stretch, Rondo defers to others and given his free throw shooting who can blame him.  We won many games during his time here we also have lost many a fourth quarter lead.   Granted, this isn't only on Rondo other guys fail to score in the fourth as well.   But Parker can go to the hole in the fourth and Rondo does not.  Parker is an 80% FT shooter.   He can drive and not worry about the FT because he can knock them down.

The Spurs didn't score a field goal in the last four minutes of their recent game 4 victory of the Grizzlies.  Luckily, for them the Grizzlies weren't lighting it up offensively either.  Troubles scoring down the stretch happen all the time to all kinds of teams. 

You'll need to show some evidence other than your own memory for me to believe that this has been a significantly bigger problem for the Celtics than for other teams over the course of the Rondo/KG/Pierce era.

Also note that the Heat scored all of three points in the final five minutes of last night's loss to the Pacers. 

[BballTim]

Parker's playoff resume is nothing to sneer at - I wouldn't say it's better than Rondo's, but I think you could certainly call it a wash and if someone else wanted to argue the Parker case I wouldn't really argue too hard about it.

Um, you made a pretty convincing case yourself.

Tony Parker has 3 rings and has been a Finals MVP. 

Statistically, Rondo comes out pretty well in the playoffs against Tony Parker over their careers, but that takes into account a lot of seasons in the early 2000s when Parker was a role player.

Parker's playoff runs this year, last year, and in 2007 are better than anything's Rondo's done, in my opinion.

  I don't think that 20/4/6 and a steal is necessarily better than 17/7/12 and 2.5 steals. I thought Rondo was clearly better than Parker last year, especially considering the 3 teams the Celts faced in the playoffs were 3rd, 4th and 6th in defense that year and the teams Parker faced were 10th, 18th and 19th.

I don't buy the "Rondo generates the same / more points" argument.  Assists are not the same thing as points.  Parker has shown the ability to be the main shot taker and shot maker for a team that goes all the way.  Rondo has not.  That's really more or less the end of the story for me.

  Your not buying it doesn't mean it isn't true. In the 2012 playoffs our offense (minus Jeff Green's 20 ppg) was significantly better despite facing significantly better defenses. The difference was Rondo generating so many points for us. Did you notice all the wide open 20 footers KG wasn't getting this year? Did you notice most of those shots were created by Rondo in the 2012 playoffs?

  And it's true Parker takes more shots than Rondo, but I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that the Celts score more efficiently off of Rondo's passes than Parker scores when he shoots the ball.

[BballTim]

Parker can score down the stretch, Rondo defers to others and given his free throw shooting who can blame him.  We won many games during his time here we also have lost many a fourth quarter lead.   Granted, this isn't only on Rondo other guys fail to score in the fourth as well.   But Parker can go to the hole in the fourth and Rondo does not.  Parker is an 80% FT shooter.   He can drive and not worry about the FT because he can knock them down.

  Over the last 2 seasons Parker's played about 50% more games than Rondo and he's made about 50% more layups in the 4th quarter or overtime. So he gets to the hole about exactly as often as Rondo in those situations.

[PhoSita]

Parker's playoff resume is nothing to sneer at - I wouldn't say it's better than Rondo's, but I think you could certainly call it a wash and if someone else wanted to argue the Parker case I wouldn't really argue too hard about it.

Um, you made a pretty convincing case yourself.

Tony Parker has 3 rings and has been a Finals MVP. 

Statistically, Rondo comes out pretty well in the playoffs against Tony Parker over their careers, but that takes into account a lot of seasons in the early 2000s when Parker was a role player.

Parker's playoff runs this year, last year, and in 2007 are better than anything's Rondo's done, in my opinion.

  I don't think that 20/4/6 and a steal is necessarily better than 17/7/12 and 2.5 steals. I thought Rondo was clearly better than Parker last year, especially considering the 3 teams the Celts faced in the playoffs were 3rd, 4th and 6th in defense that year and the teams Parker faced were 10th, 18th and 19th.

I don't buy the "Rondo generates the same / more points" argument.  Assists are not the same thing as points.  Parker has shown the ability to be the main shot taker and shot maker for a team that goes all the way.  Rondo has not.  That's really more or less the end of the story for me.

  Your not buying it doesn't mean it isn't true. In the 2012 playoffs our offense (minus Jeff Green's 20 ppg) was significantly better despite facing significantly better defenses. The difference was Rondo generating so many points for us. Did you notice all the wide open 20 footers KG wasn't getting this year? Did you notice most of those shots were created by Rondo in the 2012 playoffs?

  And it's true Parker takes more shots than Rondo, but I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that the Celts score more efficiently off of Rondo's passes than Parker scores when he shoots the ball.

I get your argument, but at the end of the day I just think it's much more valuable and rare to have a guy who can score 20-30 points efficiently, not to mention getting big buckets late in games when the opposing defense clamps down.  What Rondo does is great, but I'd rather have Parker.

To me it's sort of like asking, would you rather have Jason Kidd or Isiah Thomas?  I can see the argument for Kidd, but personally I'd rather build my team around Isiah.

[Clench123]

Seriously, blowing it up is never a good thing.  Just reload, reboot, and shoot.  Rebuild always sends you to the back of the pack and that means you'll stay there for a very long time before you can fight your way back again (that's even if you can)

[Celtics18]

Parker can score down the stretch, Rondo defers to others and given his free throw shooting who can blame him.  We won many games during his time here we also have lost many a fourth quarter lead.   Granted, this isn't only on Rondo other guys fail to score in the fourth as well.   But Parker can go to the hole in the fourth and Rondo does not.  Parker is an 80% FT shooter.   He can drive and not worry about the FT because he can knock them down.

  Over the last 2 seasons Parker's played about 50% more games than Rondo and he's made about 50% more layups in the 4th quarter or overtime. So he gets to the hole about exactly as often as Rondo in those situations.

That doesn't even account for all the passes that Rondo makes for easy baskets for teammates once he gets in the lane and collapses the defense.  I don't have any numbers for that, but I'm sure we can all reasonably surmise that Rondo would be among the league leaders in the category of assists from the paint (I know he was the league leader in assists leading to points in the paint this past season).

[BballTim]

Parker's playoff resume is nothing to sneer at - I wouldn't say it's better than Rondo's, but I think you could certainly call it a wash and if someone else wanted to argue the Parker case I wouldn't really argue too hard about it.

Um, you made a pretty convincing case yourself.

Tony Parker has 3 rings and has been a Finals MVP. 

Statistically, Rondo comes out pretty well in the playoffs against Tony Parker over their careers, but that takes into account a lot of seasons in the early 2000s when Parker was a role player.

Parker's playoff runs this year, last year, and in 2007 are better than anything's Rondo's done, in my opinion.

  I don't think that 20/4/6 and a steal is necessarily better than 17/7/12 and 2.5 steals. I thought Rondo was clearly better than Parker last year, especially considering the 3 teams the Celts faced in the playoffs were 3rd, 4th and 6th in defense that year and the teams Parker faced were 10th, 18th and 19th.

I don't buy the "Rondo generates the same / more points" argument.  Assists are not the same thing as points.  Parker has shown the ability to be the main shot taker and shot maker for a team that goes all the way.  Rondo has not.  That's really more or less the end of the story for me.

  Your not buying it doesn't mean it isn't true. In the 2012 playoffs our offense (minus Jeff Green's 20 ppg) was significantly better despite facing significantly better defenses. The difference was Rondo generating so many points for us. Did you notice all the wide open 20 footers KG wasn't getting this year? Did you notice most of those shots were created by Rondo in the 2012 playoffs?

  And it's true Parker takes more shots than Rondo, but I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that the Celts score more efficiently off of Rondo's passes than Parker scores when he shoots the ball.

I get your argument, but at the end of the day I just think it's much more valuable and rare to have a guy who can score 20-30 points efficiently, not to mention getting big buckets late in games when the opposing defense clamps down.  What Rondo does is great, but I'd rather have Parker.

To me it's sort of like asking, would you rather have Jason Kidd or Isiah Thomas?  I can see the argument for Kidd, but personally I'd rather build my team around Isiah.

  Thomas got more assists than Kidd. It's more like Kidd vs Payton (or a Payton that's not the defender he was) and I'd rather build my team around Kidd.

[PhoSita]

  Thomas got more assists than Kidd. It's more like Kidd vs Payton (or a Payton that's not the defender he was) and I'd rather build my team around Kidd.

Yeah, I don't think Payton is a fair comparison.  We're talking about one guard (Parker) who is as good a scorer at the position as anybody and who has been the key guy for a title team, and helped lead his team deep into the playoffs many other times.  The other guy (Rondo), is a triple-double threat who has also led his team deep, but hasn't been able to assume that mantle as the lead scorer or crunch time shot-maker.  He relies on his teammates to close out games, even when he's grabbing rebounds, dishing out assists, and getting acrobatic layups to fall.

Rondo doesn't measure up to Kidd just as Parker doesn't quite measure up to Thomas.  But I think the analogy is mostly a fair one, even if Isiah got more assists.  Parker is not nearly as much a passer, though he's clearly shown the ability to get assists when that's what the game offers him.

My point is that if I'm deciding between building my team around a 12-10-5-2 guy or a 20-7-3-2 guy, I'll take the 20-7-3-2 guy, assuming the second guy is an elite crunch time scorer and the first guy isn't.

[Celtics18]

Parker's playoff resume is nothing to sneer at - I wouldn't say it's better than Rondo's, but I think you could certainly call it a wash and if someone else wanted to argue the Parker case I wouldn't really argue too hard about it.

Um, you made a pretty convincing case yourself.

Tony Parker has 3 rings and has been a Finals MVP. 

Statistically, Rondo comes out pretty well in the playoffs against Tony Parker over their careers, but that takes into account a lot of seasons in the early 2000s when Parker was a role player.

Parker's playoff runs this year, last year, and in 2007 are better than anything's Rondo's done, in my opinion.

  I don't think that 20/4/6 and a steal is necessarily better than 17/7/12 and 2.5 steals. I thought Rondo was clearly better than Parker last year, especially considering the 3 teams the Celts faced in the playoffs were 3rd, 4th and 6th in defense that year and the teams Parker faced were 10th, 18th and 19th.

I don't buy the "Rondo generates the same / more points" argument.  Assists are not the same thing as points.  Parker has shown the ability to be the main shot taker and shot maker for a team that goes all the way.  Rondo has not.  That's really more or less the end of the story for me.

  Your not buying it doesn't mean it isn't true. In the 2012 playoffs our offense (minus Jeff Green's 20 ppg) was significantly better despite facing significantly better defenses. The difference was Rondo generating so many points for us. Did you notice all the wide open 20 footers KG wasn't getting this year? Did you notice most of those shots were created by Rondo in the 2012 playoffs?

  And it's true Parker takes more shots than Rondo, but I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that the Celts score more efficiently off of Rondo's passes than Parker scores when he shoots the ball.

I get your argument, but at the end of the day I just think it's much more valuable and rare to have a guy who can score 20-30 points efficiently, not to mention getting big buckets late in games when the opposing defense clamps down.  What Rondo does is great, but I'd rather have Parker.

To me it's sort of like asking, would you rather have Jason Kidd or Isiah Thomas?  I can see the argument for Kidd, but personally I'd rather build my team around Isiah.

Last season, eleven players averaged more than 20 points per game.  One player averaged more than 10 assists per game.  The "rare" part of your argument is clearly untrue.  A passer like Rondo is actually more rare than a scorer like Parker. 

Clearly, right now, Parker is more valuable.  His team's still playing, and he just got done with probably the best playoff series of his life to help lead his team to another finals appearance.  Rondo's been limping around, recovering from surgery since February. 

Rondo's also four years younger and based on his past performances, I think it's very fair to expect that he has a few more playoff series left in his career to rival the ones he had in 2009 vs. Chicago, in 2010 vs. Cleveland, 2011 vs. New York,  and 2012 vs. Miami (those are just his finest ones).   

 

[PhoSita]

Parker's playoff resume is nothing to sneer at - I wouldn't say it's better than Rondo's, but I think you could certainly call it a wash and if someone else wanted to argue the Parker case I wouldn't really argue too hard about it.

Um, you made a pretty convincing case yourself.

Tony Parker has 3 rings and has been a Finals MVP. 

Statistically, Rondo comes out pretty well in the playoffs against Tony Parker over their careers, but that takes into account a lot of seasons in the early 2000s when Parker was a role player.

Parker's playoff runs this year, last year, and in 2007 are better than anything's Rondo's done, in my opinion.

  I don't think that 20/4/6 and a steal is necessarily better than 17/7/12 and 2.5 steals. I thought Rondo was clearly better than Parker last year, especially considering the 3 teams the Celts faced in the playoffs were 3rd, 4th and 6th in defense that year and the teams Parker faced were 10th, 18th and 19th.

I don't buy the "Rondo generates the same / more points" argument.  Assists are not the same thing as points.  Parker has shown the ability to be the main shot taker and shot maker for a team that goes all the way.  Rondo has not.  That's really more or less the end of the story for me.

  Your not buying it doesn't mean it isn't true. In the 2012 playoffs our offense (minus Jeff Green's 20 ppg) was significantly better despite facing significantly better defenses. The difference was Rondo generating so many points for us. Did you notice all the wide open 20 footers KG wasn't getting this year? Did you notice most of those shots were created by Rondo in the 2012 playoffs?

  And it's true Parker takes more shots than Rondo, but I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that the Celts score more efficiently off of Rondo's passes than Parker scores when he shoots the ball.

I get your argument, but at the end of the day I just think it's much more valuable and rare to have a guy who can score 20-30 points efficiently, not to mention getting big buckets late in games when the opposing defense clamps down.  What Rondo does is great, but I'd rather have Parker.

To me it's sort of like asking, would you rather have Jason Kidd or Isiah Thomas?  I can see the argument for Kidd, but personally I'd rather build my team around Isiah.

Last season, eleven players averaged more than 20 points per game.  One player averaged more than 10 assists per game.  The "rare" part of your argument is clearly untrue.  A passer like Rondo is actually more rare than a scorer like Parker. 

Clearly, right now, Parker is more valuable.  His team's still playing, and he just got done with probably the best playoff series of his life to help lead his team to another finals appearance.  Rondo's been limping around, recovering from surgery since February. 

Rondo's also four years younger and based on his past performances, I think it's very fair to expect that he has a few more playoff series left in his career to rival the ones he had in 2009 vs. Chicago, in 2010 vs. Cleveland, 2011 vs. New York,  and 2012 vs. Miami (those are just his finest ones).

A point guard who can score like Parker is very rare -- in my opinion there's nobody at that position as effective as he is, all things considered.  Especially when you consider that he's also a very capable passer.  He doesn't get as many assists because that's not the way the Spurs' system works.  If you counted Parker's "hockey assists" I'm guessing he would seem like more of a passer statistically.  Don't get me wrong, Rondo is a rare talent as well.  Any team would love to have either Parker or Rondo as one of their key pieces.  But with Parker I think you are closer to having a contender if he's your starting point than with Rondo, because if you have Rondo you still need that elite leading scorer.